Ed Parker on change says it all!

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by roryneil
If you are going to 3, why not just 2, push or pull

Very good question. Hammering should get its own catagory purly because that is the way our muscles work. It is a very specific downward motion that enhances thrust but is in fact not a push. I think it could probaly be broken down into just the two but the study of when a hammer ends and when the thrust begins is vital to extracting speed and power from the grafting of the two.

 

[ArnoldLee]

Originally posted by cdhall
OK.

Then on Thundering Hammers for example.

Is that first strike with your Right Arm

a) Thrusting into your opponent
or
b) Lifting into your opponent

I think it can be said to be doing both or either if I understand correctly. Clue me in. Is this a good example?

The right arm strike is a thrust grafted into a lift. In other words the motion starts out relayed and then the arm fuses.

Originally posted by rmcrobertson


Just to throw my own bit into this particular pot of stone soup, I'd argue that a) this idea limits everything in kenpo to striking, b) this way of describing strikes suggests that power is generated only from the upper body.

Note that a) only the arms are being discussed, b) there are a lot of comments such as, "in the shoulder...where the motion originates."

This idea is not limited to striking. ANY motion can be referenced in this manner (including grappling), choose any technique and it can be broken down in this way.

Yes only the arms are being discussed... for now. The reason the shoulder is being addressed is to simplify the explanation. I like to use the saying "isolate then integrate". You can Hammer, Thrust, Whip and Lift with the legs as well. Power can be generated from the shoulders, the hips, the ground etc. and it can all be tied together.

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Just to throw my own bit into this particular pot of stone soup, I'd argue that a) this idea limits everything in kenpo to striking, b) this way of describing strikes suggests that power is generated only from the upper body.

Note that a) only the arms are being discussed, b) there are a lot of comments such as, "in the shoulder...where the motion originates."

Well said. But some of this would still apply I think even though the first strike of Thundering Hammers for example is done with a shuffle/back-up mass. Here the lower body is generating power but you are still striking with the arm.

Although the knee strikes could well be characterized as Thrusts and Hammers I think.

Anyway, good points.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Just to throw my own bit into this particular pot of stone soup, I'd argue that a) this idea limits everything in kenpo to striking, b) this way of describing strikes suggests that power is generated only from the upper body.

Note that a) only the arms are being discussed, b) there are a lot of comments such as, "in the shoulder...where the motion originates."

Robert,
we are not discussing the legs but the principle is the same. A front kick would sound like this... to pick up the knee is a thrusting motion; extending your leg to kick is a hammer; the return motion is hammer in reverse to a thrust in reverse.
sound complex?

 

[rmcrobertson]

Uh...sorry, but lifting my knee is not merely a thrust.

Part of what I'm trying to say is that the priority is backwards: to state the obvious, power (and techniques) are built from the ground up, not the shoulders down. or they should be.

I don't see the "first move," of the ideal-phase Thundering Hammers as that right hammer/forearm. I see the "first move," as, "step foward with your left foot into a left neutral bow, while simultaneously executing a left inward block."

I also note that even when the legs' action is being described here, it's done with a focus on the periphery of the body--the extremities--rather than the center, a focus (which, I believe, is ultimately incorrect) which is the same as the focus on the upper body--but rotated ninety degrees, if that makes any sense.

What's left out, in other words, is circular motion. I know--the hips' turning will be described as a whip, yes? I'd argue that its EFFECT may be whipping, but that the motion is different.

I'd also argue that while kenpo may certainly (and should, at times) be boiled down to basic principles/actions/keys, there is also a danger of losing the distinctions--the differences--upon which recall, and knowledge, are based.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson
Uh...sorry, but lifting my knee is not merely a thrust.

Part of what I'm trying to say is that the priority is backwards: to state the obvious, power (and techniques) are built from the ground up, not the shoulders down. or they should be.

I don't see the "first move," of the ideal-phase Thundering Hammers as that right hammer/forearm. I see the "first move," as, "step foward with your left foot into a left neutral bow, while simultaneously executing a left inward block."

I also note that even when the legs' action is being described here, it's done with a focus on the periphery of the body--the extremities--rather than the center, a focus (which, I believe, is ultimately incorrect) which is the same as the focus on the upper body--but rotated ninety degrees, if that makes any sense.

What's left out, in other words, is circular motion. I know--the hips' turning will be described as a whip, yes? I'd argue that its EFFECT may be whipping, but that the motion is different.

I'd also argue that while kenpo may certainly (and should, at times) be boiled down to basic principles/actions/keys, there is also a danger of losing the distinctions--the differences--upon which recall, and knowledge, are based.

If it makes you feel any better we dont classify inward blocks as a hammering motion either( that is contact is usualy made on the thrusting half of the move ). If you don't want to break down the art into proximal and distal motion that is totaly up to you; however, to assume we only pay attention to the distal is an erronious assumption. SO, the hammer is the proximal and the thrust is distal in the "inward block." Of course, your legs play a part in the execution. I haven't read a single post on the subject that suggested otherwise. Reject the whole concept if you like, it makes no difference to me.
Sean

 

[ArnoldLee]

Originally posted by rmcrobertson

Part of what I'm trying to say is that the priority is backwards: to state the obvious, power (and techniques) are built from the ground up, not the shoulders down. or they should be.

You are right, in execution the power is generated from the ground. However for the purposes of this discussion and my reply to Clyde and Cdhall I was assuming that they can do a good forward bow and was just concentrating on the shoulder muscles.

I don't see the "first move," of the ideal-phase Thundering Hammers as that right hammer/forearm. I see the "first move," as, "step foward with your left foot into a left neutral bow, while simultaneously executing a left inward block."

Again correct, it should have been worded "second" move. I believe what was trying to be conveyed was the first major move that the right hand makes

I also note that even when the legs' action is being described here, it's done with a focus on the periphery of the body--the extremities--rather than the center, a focus (which, I believe, is ultimately incorrect) which is the same as the focus on the upper body--but rotated ninety degrees, if that makes any sense.

Absolutely. The better a student gets at kenpo their motion will become more proximal to the center of the body. As a Pilates instructor I cannot emphasize enough how important the core is in generating force. That said I believe that the point of the Thrusting discussion is being missed. If you are talking about the shoulder the focus IS being directed closer to the center of the body. The shoulder being more centered to the core than the extremeties. We can discuss this further from there and expand to the body (hips, etc.)

What's left out, in other words, is circular motion. I know--the hips' turning will be described as a whip, yes? I'd argue that its EFFECT may be whipping, but that the motion is different.

The hips turning can be a whip but may be different depending upon where you initially begin. Also circular motion is not left out. It can be viewed from a diagonal plane. If you look at the motion three dimensionally you can see it.

I'd also argue that while kenpo may certainly (and should, at times) be boiled down to basic principles/actions/keys, there is also a danger of losing the distinctions--the differences--upon which recall, and knowledge, are based.

Yes absolutely. However this particular idea or model of motion (hammer, thrust, whip) in fact distinguishes and differentiates the muscular motion and can help a student recall exactly what they are supposed to do with their body. If anything I'd argue that putting in artificial differences in techniques and/or motions will create a condition where a student may recall a technique but doing so will ultimately be less useful for them since they will not be (or at least much less be) able to recreate that move outside of the context of that technique.

Uh...sorry, but lifting my knee is not merely a thrust.

Actually I'd have to agree with T'O'D with on this. Lifting the knee can be defined in this context as thrust.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Originally posted by Seig
Oh that's very clever If you really believe that you are only rehashing three moves in the entire system, then you are not paying close enough attention.

To whom?

 

[MJS]

The American Kenpo Karate International (A.K.K.I.) is headed by 9th Degree Black Belt, Paul Mills. The schools and clubs of the A.K.K.I. have very skillful and knowledgeable instructors that teach the art as outlined by Mr. Mills. The A.K.K.I. has Ed Parker's Kenpo System at it's base, but has expanded the curriculum to include many new empty hand, stand up grappling, ground fighting, knife (single & double) and stick (single & double) material that was not previously addressed in Mr. Parker's system.



This is something that I found while looking at a few Kenpo sites. I thought that the last few paragraphs say quite a bit! This is exactly what I was talking about. He teaches the base style and added things that were not addressed by Parker. Does anybody fault him for doing this?????

Mike

 

[Sigung86]

Oh.... I imagine if you look hard enough you might find someone. Also, I could be wrong here, but isn't Mr. Mills a 10th degree now?

 

[MJS]

Just to clarify. This is something that I came across. I took it word for word from his site. As for being a 10th or 9th....I have no idea.

Mike

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by MJS
Just to clarify. This is something that I came across. I took it word for word from his site. As for being a 10th or 9th....I have no idea.

Mike

I just now saw this post, I'm not sure what all you had posted previously but as far as public info from the AKKI site:

http://www.akki.com/indexs/indexpage.htm
Paul Mills
President & Founder
10th Degree Black Belt

http://www.akki.com/indexs/indexpage.htm

March 2003 AKKI Las Vegas Camp Recap
By Bruce Smith

...Mr. Elsasser called Mr. Mills up to the stage and explained to him that the entire Board of Directors of the AKKI and all representatives, and members of the AKKI had gotten together, discussed and agreed that it was time for Mr. Mills to take the next step for the betterment of the AKKI. Mr. Elsasser explained that Mr. Parker stated that no student(s) may promote an instructor, but the board, reps and members may Sanction and stand behind this promotion, which is exactly what the AKKI has done....

Personally I've seen a few minutes of some video of Mr. Mills in action and, well, he certainly appears to have "the goods." And I think the theory of him pursuing evolution of the system is great. He seems well-suited for it. As long as he keeps the original curriculum as the base and point of reference, then I think he is also doing his students a great service.

Just my opinion.
:asian:

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by cdhall
I just now saw this post, I'm not sure what all you had posted previously but as far as public info from the AKKI site:

http://www.akki.com/indexs/indexpage.htm
Paul Mills
President & Founder
10th Degree Black Belt

http://www.akki.com/indexs/indexpage.htm

March 2003 AKKI Las Vegas Camp Recap
By Bruce Smith

...Mr. Elsasser called Mr. Mills up to the stage and explained to him that the entire Board of Directors of the AKKI and all representatives, and members of the AKKI had gotten together, discussed and agreed that it was time for Mr. Mills to take the next step for the betterment of the AKKI. Mr. Elsasser explained that Mr. Parker stated that no student(s) may promote an instructor, but the board, reps and members may Sanction and stand behind this promotion, which is exactly what the AKKI has done....

Personally I've seen a few minutes of some video of Mr. Mills in action and, well, he certainly appears to have "the goods." And I think the theory of him pursuing evolution of the system is great. He seems well-suited for it. As long as he keeps the original curriculum as the base and point of reference, then I think he is also doing his students a great service.

Just my opinion.
:asian:

Actually he is "interpreting" the conceptions he learned, not "evolving" commercial Kenpo. He is doing what notables like Larry Tatum amd others have been doing for years. Everyone by design in motion-based kenpo is capable of interpreting concepts, but some do it much better than others, and some are just awful. He, and others, are doing just what Parker intended. Those who like his interpretation are entitled to bestow any honors they feel comfortable with.

 

[ProfessorKenpo]

Originally posted by Doc
Actually he is "interpreting" the conceptions he learned, not "evolving" commercial Kenpo. He is doing what notables like Larry Tatum amd others have been doing for years. Everyone by design in motion-based kenpo is capable of interpreting concepts, but some do it much better than others, and some are just awful. He, and others, are doing just what Parker intended. Those who like his interpretation are entitled to bestow any honors they feel comfortable with.

He is not doing what Larry is doing, not even close. Mr. Mills does not teach the EPAK curriculum, he teaches one of his own design. Please do not imply they are doing the same thing.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by ProfessorKenpo
He is not doing what Larry is doing, not even close. Mr. Mills does not teach the EPAK curriculum, he teaches one of his own design. Please do not imply they are doing the same thing.


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

I didn't say or imply anything. I said they are both "interpreting," I didn't say they were teaching or interpreting in the same manner.

 

[jeffkyle]

It seems to me they are both doing something completely different as well. Just putting my 2 cents in. For what it is worth now a days.

 

[cdhall]

Originally posted by jeffkyle
It seems to me they are both doing something completely different as well. Just putting my 2 cents in. For what it is worth now a days.

Ditto again.

I did not get that Doc said they were doing the same curriculum, but that they were both doing at least some stuff that they had developed or interpreted themselves.

Same general idea, different specific application/outcome.

Mr. Mills has clips on his website. They are not EPAK techniques. And I've heard Mr. Mills has re-written the AKKI manuals and may not even teach the EPAK stuff as Mr. Parker left it.

On the other hand, I thought Mr. Tatum did teach the 32 technique curriculum as outlined in Book 5. Clyde would know. Is that right?

 

[MJS]

Looking at the material that Mr. Mills teaches, he does list tech. that are the same in EPAK. However, he does mention that he has modified them and even added to the material that he teaches. Its still the same stuff, meaning that he is still doing Kenpo, but just going about it in a different way.

Mike

 

[Kenpo Yahoo]

Actually he is "interpreting" the conceptions he learned, not "evolving" commercial Kenpo.

Yeah okay, sure. Whatever you say.

Mr. Mills does not teach the EPAK curriculum, he teaches one of his own design. Please do not imply they are doing the same thing.

For once I agree with Clyde. Please don't lump us in with them.

Mr. Mills has clips on his website. They are not EPAK techniques. And I've heard Mr. Mills has re-written the AKKI manuals and may not even teach the EPAK stuff as Mr. Parker left it.

The clips that are up right now are short and sweet and do not give any real insight into AKKI philosophy, movement, tactics, or whatever else you want to call it. I believe the webmaster is in the process of redesigning the site and adding new clips. Yes Mr. Mills has decided to keep some of the Parker tech names but the execution of the techniques is something that most have not seen before.

Is Mr. Parkers system the base of AKKI kenpo? Come on, of course it is. It's just that Mr. Mills has decided to combine what he learned from fighting, with what he learned from Parker and give it to us, his Assoc. members. The AKKI has gotten a bad rap from just about everybody, and honestly we could care less. I've learned more from the short time I've been around Mr. Mills than I could have ever imagined.

Ron, It's no secret that you don't like Mr. Mills. If you want to call what we do, commercial kenpo or motion kenpo then fine. Do what you want. The fact of the matter is that it works and it works well. Some people will like it and some people won't, just a fact of life. It's really no different than when Parker was King.

Its still the same stuff, meaning that he is still doing Kenpo, but just going about it in a different way.

well apparently MJS has the right idea.

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by Kenpo Yahoo
Yeah okay, sure. Whatever you say.
For once I agree with Clyde. Please don't lump us in with them.

I suggest you re-read what I said. The information used as a base must be interpreted to be effective, and that is what I said. I never suggested everyone was doing the same thing, and in fact have always stated just the opposite.

Ron, It's no secret that you don't like Mr. Mills.

Mr. YAhoo, you don't know me that well but it is clear that I probably out rank you and am significantly older than you. As far as my relationship with Paul, you apparently don't know that either. I go back to his beginning with Parker and he and I seem to get along fine in spite of your uniformed opinion.

If you want to call what we do, commercial kenpo or motion kenpo then fine.

I did not say that either. I said most interpretations are based on the commercial kenpo structure. There was kenpo before that model you know. Perhaps you should be a bit more objective in your reading.

Do what you want. The fact of the matter is that it works and it works well.

I never gave my opinion on its effectiveness either, we were having a discussion on interpretation and evolution. My assumption is, if you do it you probably feel it is effective. I have no problem with that.

Some people will like it and some people won't, just a fact of life.

Once again I gave no opinion either way. Perhaps you should ask questions if you are unsure what someone is saying. I do Mr. YA hoo. Thank you for the discussion.